Re: [avr-libc-dev] New Atomic.h header?

[Christian Ludlam]

On 7 Jan Joerg Wunsch wrote:

> Also, I tend to not start up yet another header file for these, but would
> rather include them into <avr/interrupt.h>.  Perhaps we should pick names
> that are reserved for the implementation then, to not collide with any
> possible (different) version in any existing application --
> <avr/interrupt.h> is likely to be included into almost everything on earth.
> So the suggestion is to use _ATOMIC_BLOCK() rather than ATOMIC_BLOCK() etc.
> Again, opinions about this?

I'd far prefer a new header file - it keeps all the atomic functions together
and it avoids precisely this sort of problem. It is after all a new API (as
opposed to an extension of the existing interrupt API).

-- 
Christian Ludlam
address@hidden